Evolution of Westernization

After reviewing cases of westernization from recent history, I became more and more taken in by the creation of a new culture; a mixture between the culture of non-western countries and that of the United States. Originally, these countries had strong religious doctrines, traditions, food, ideals of beauty and power, and politics unique to themselves; lifestyles that generations were accustomed to. Over time, westernization has gone from an imperial objective to a democratic one. However, the results of either are very much the same. What remains is a codependent nation, which no longer thrives off its unique structure and make-up. Whether it be imperialism or democracy, when the nation is left in ruin, in poverty and hunger, and the general will of the people is not met, then westernization as an evolution has been unsuccessful.
Through all five case studies, the United States has had numerous ulterior motives for occupying other regions. Most motives circle around natural resources, particularly oil, for the purpose of serving the United States. Nations that were promised aid from poverty were only deprived of their resource without pay and left without help.
In Africa of 1994, a horrific AIDS pandemic had broken out, only to be dismissed by President Clinton in order to resist action. Meanwhile, the very same area became occupied by American soldiers for the salvaging of oil. The natives were then beaten and harassed by American soldiers. In Iran, Shah Reza after appointment by the United States, inflicted numerous western policies but through the means of terrorism. History shows, the spread of western ideas, such as democracy, takes precedence over the betterment and well-being of a nation and its people.

These acts are no different from the work of European missionaries in the new America back in the 1400’s. It is true that there is strength in numbers. Therefore, Charles Darwin’s viewpoint of evolution has proven true through trials over hundreds of years. The United States is the most powerful country in the world and is simply asserting its power as a nation, a democracy, as a country founded on a monotheistic religion. Therefore, it is possible to say that the evolution of westernization is successful in the biological sense. The strongest prevail and the weak succumb or die out. Does this mean the death of a myriad of ancient cultures and the prevalence of a democratic world, all allied to the United States of America?
“Democracy” is defined in the United States Pledge of Allegiance as “liberty and justice for all”. It is not difficult to forecast that without the essential living systems in place—food, running water, security, housing, transportation, healthcare, --much of the developing world will not join the “westernizing” globalization party. “The discontented will become the disenfranchised. They will bring down the house. If you have nothing, then you have nothing to lose.” (James Canton, “The Extreme Future”)
Chris Wright, a writer for The New York Observer, states in an article published on March 20, 2006: “maybe Americans will now look more closely at Dubai (Arab-Emirates). Of its many expatriates, the vast majority is from the subcontinent—the overworked and underpaid construction workers, the builders of this miracle who will never get to share in its bounty. These people are joined by the Filipino ashtray-emptiers, the Egyptian cab drivers, the Moroccan floor sweepers. Dubai is an extremely stratified city, not so much a melting pot as a layer cake. And you get a sense that those who occupy the bottom layer harbor a seething, potentially violent resentment toward the rest of us.”
Darwin’s law states “survival of the fittest”. What determines the most fit in our societies today:--the most wealth, the most land, the strongest religious group, or the greatest minds? It must be the power to integrate and balance all of these factors. This is what will make a great society, one that does not divide and conquer, but one that leads so others desire to join.